EPT[D] Why us lower level players hate "macro better" - Page 25
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Darth Caedus
United States326 Posts
| ||
|
Ripps
Canada97 Posts
Mechanics > Strategy, methinks. | ||
|
ArcticFox
United States1092 Posts
On October 11 2011 11:11 Demonace34 wrote: Well that is what I said in my post, surviving on 2 bases, have a good timing attack/aggression while taking a 3rd. This tests your transition from 1 base macro into 2 base macro (transferring workers, when to throw down your structures, not getting supply blocked and being able to hold off early aggression from your opponent). Instead of hitting a wall with 1 base play (which doesn't take much macro focus at all) you can focus on 2 base play and adjust your play to hold off their 1/2 base aggression. The point is that if you keep winning within 10 minutes with perfect 1 base macro, it becomes that much harder on 2 base. Either way if a player is focusing on 1 base play, he only has a 1 base plan and has to rely on a little macro, a lot of micro and crisp timing. If the player goes for a 2 base play he focuses mainly on macro while also having to be careful with units and having crisp timing to hold off any early pressure. The difference is that the 1 base player is actually not pushing himself to his limits by staying on one base and will almost always have shorter games than the player going for 2 bases and making just enough units to hold off 1 base tech/aggression. This is what is wrong though. Short game macro teaches less than long game macro. The community should be teaching pressure builds into expansions, not finger crossing builds that hope they didn't scout and put up extra bunkers to stop your push. I guess the question is how far in the development of the game is the player? You're not going to sit down a player who is brand new to the game and teach him how to hold all types of TvP aggression with a 1rax gasless FE, or how to do a FFE in PvZ to hold every type of aggression. Those are inherently risky builds to begin with, and defending properly with those builds comes with a greater understanding of how units work in relation to one another. How do you learn these things? By doing *super* safe 1base builds that give you all kinds of units. Then you figure out how you can cut corners and squeeze out an expansion, and still have enough units to be safe. Then you can cut more corners and pop out a critical upgrade or a tech structure. Everything builds from the basics. If you have someone who is already perfectly macroing their 1-base build, then you can expand that out to a 2base style. There is no way someone who is relatively new is going to be able to sit down and pull out a 2base macro style, hit their depots on time, get their production down when it's supposed to go down, get the upgrades when they need to, and keep worker and unit production up properly. It's hard enough to perfectly nail that on 1 base when you're getting started. You may be overestimating how easy it is to macro a 1base build. I have a friend who I've been trying to help improve by basically doing the same thing. He 4gates literally every game, but the timing is always late. The amount of units he should have at 6:30, he instead would have at 9:00. That reduced down to 8:30, then down to 8:00, and is now down to about 7:15. He is currently Top 8 Gold. What would be the point of trying to teach a 3gate robo build, or a 1gate FE, or a FFE build to somebody who can't build probes and pylons effectively enough to 4gate in the first place? Mind you, a lot of the things I said about the development of builds has already been done by players over the past year. Thus, when you're comfortable with how to macro a 1-base style, you can simply steal the builds of the players that have come before you. Instead of trying to figure out exactly when to put down your expansion, or how many units you should have, or when you should be scouting for possible pressure, you just pick your favorite pro, download a bunch of replays, and steal the build. Play it a few times, and you can get a feel for why the build works, where it's weak, how it can be exploited, the timings you need to watch for and be prepared to defend against. The point is, trying to teach a complicated and delicate 2-base build to someone who can't macro a 1-base build properly is wasted effort. Learn to macro a 1-base build properly, then steal a 2-base build and learn how to macro it properly, then learn when it's safe to take a 3rd, then get used to macroing it properly. It all builds from the ground up. | ||
|
Efemral
Australia67 Posts
The joys of winning through strategy should be available to any player of any skill level. As long as the opponent's macro game is roughly the same then certainly a player can chose to win through superior strategy. And if thinking strategically is more fun to you than working like a slave at your macro... then more power to you! | ||
|
gengka
Malaysia461 Posts
In my opinion, to make your life easier later on, its most important to learn the habit of scouting and how to interpret the info that you scouted, identify the type of cheese play opponent using (low level players cheese ALOT! learn to deal with it). n then, learn to defend the cheese! When u are comfortable on defending cheese play, then you can proceed working on your macro. Or else you will always be interrupted by all kinds of cheese play and your macro learning wont progress smoothly. You can also learn to cheese as well but i don't recommend that way. Afterall macro is the ultimate way to become a good player. | ||
|
HypaSnipa
64 Posts
So to come on the forums with a low level replay and want a strategy discussion seems unfit for a website like TL, which is a very Macro or Die type of forum. The battlenet forums offer plenty of strategical advice because there is a larger gathering of players with rough understanding of the game rather than masters level. The fun part of Starcraft (at least in my case) is developing your own builds,timings, scouting patterns (basically your style) and find things that help you defend certain situations. Even if your macro is terrible, SC should always be fun because of the strategical aspect which really involves your own abilities to play the game no matter what level you are at. This is why it's the best eSport around and is something to be enjoyed without using the forums to talk about specific strategies at low levels, much better discussion will arise with a friend or chat channel than it will here. Macro or Die. It's almost coherent I apologize. Basically, enjoy learning strategies on your own, do less forum viewing, and more gaming. Find some practice partners and have discussions about strategies with them. You will get alot more out of your games and less hateful Macro oriented responses. | ||
|
(kimi)YaSu
Australia12 Posts
Most players who are active also read the forums for tips and therefore all of our macro has gotten better. The standards of starcraft has risen. | ||
|
D_K_night
Canada615 Posts
On October 07 2011 11:40 tuestresfat wrote: I remember seeing a Master player ladder an account from bronze to diamond by making stalkers and stalkers only, never harassing or scouting (besides initial probe scout), expanding at standard timings, getting upgrades at standard timings, never putting any pressure on his opponent, and a-clicking his opponent's base when he was at 200/200. Seriously just macro, if you want a strategy, make pure stalkers. well hang on a second. I saw that exact post on reddit, and the guy was condescending as hell about it. He was basically advocating sitting in your base, macroing to 200/200 and A move, and he slammed anyone who couldn't do exactly the same as him. Seriously he was one cocky loser who honestly was spouting wrongful information. He's giving completely false hope to bronze players who, when they try to copy what he does, fails. what's this "expanding at standard timings" what a second...isn't that something that a bronzie isn't supposed to be even concerned with? how about "getting upgrades at standard timings" starting to see a theme here? A bronze player, according to this community, shouldn't even be concerned with what the hell a "standard timing" is, remember? Look at the hierarchy. It states that a "timing" is only masters and above material, stuff that anyone below has no right to even see, right? It goes to show you simply cannot, and should not, believe everything you read. If he were to request this so-called A Move player to provide a list of the last 100 replays where he did nothing but A Move 200/200 stalkers and win, I bet you that he can't provide that. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
On October 11 2011 13:12 Ripps wrote: Didn't Destiny go from Bronze to Masters using Mass Queens only? Mechanics > Strategy, methinks. Last I heard he stalled around platinum, I'll let you know when I watch the rest of the games this evening. His games are are more an example of GM macro+GM micro+GM scouting and reaction>Absolutely terrible strategy. The A-moving stalker guy should be your go-to example for Macro>Micro and to a lesser extent strategy, since mass stalker is actually a viable strat unlike mass queen. His main thing seems to be blindly building defences(IE not scouting), not harassing and not doing anything but Amoving(IE no micro) | ||
|
Demonace34
United States2493 Posts
On October 11 2011 16:16 D_K_night wrote: well hang on a second. I saw that exact post on reddit, and the guy was condescending as hell about it. He was basically advocating sitting in your base, macroing to 200/200 and A move, and he slammed anyone who couldn't do exactly the same as him. Seriously he was one cocky loser who honestly was spouting wrongful information. He's giving completely false hope to bronze players who, when they try to copy what he does, fails. what's this "expanding at standard timings" what a second...isn't that something that a bronzie isn't supposed to be even concerned with? how about "getting upgrades at standard timings" starting to see a theme here? A bronze player, according to this community, shouldn't even be concerned with what the hell a "standard timing" is, remember? Look at the hierarchy. It states that a "timing" is only masters and above material, stuff that anyone below has no right to even see, right? It goes to show you simply cannot, and should not, believe everything you read. If he were to request this so-called A Move player to provide a list of the last 100 replays where he did nothing but A Move 200/200 stalkers and win, I bet you that he can't provide that. When people are talking about timings it is more about aggressive pushing around a certain time or when a vital upgrade is researched. The things lower level players have the hardest time with is always producing workers, having the right amount of production facilities per base and getting supply blocked. The guy who did only stalkers on reddit posted a replay pack of his games and did get around diamond without anything but one unit. He was condescending because he was sick of lower level people posting help on forums wondering why they lost a game and blaming their strategy for their loss instead of their macro. If you read all the guides on TL about improving and have 1 good build for each match-up while focusing on creating workers and making expansions while not getting supply blocked and always producing out of your structures then you will go up leagues even if your micro and execution is bad. Eventually strategy and micro will become more prevalent as they are needed at the top levels to trade armies efficiently. Anyway, SCII is a game of economics and that is why macro is always the first problem to look at correcting before anything else. | ||
|
Kid-Fox
Canada400 Posts
On October 11 2011 12:53 Darth Caedus wrote: Fantastic (and hilarious) example of "macro better" in the Day9 Funday Monday that just finished up. The last game a troll won a 2v2 by doing nothing but mass expanding, making SCVs and then attacking with 138 SCVs to win the game. Macro with horrific strategy ftw. That troll was SlayerS_Cella. Gandi power! T_T That game is a very strange example of "macro beats all". Cella's partner made MM, which was beaten by stalkers and marines. Cella actually kept his money down and I don't remember him really transferring much money to his partner despite the sick income he was getting. Thus with good macro he took out 2 players with pure workers (and upgrades). Sure stalkers can micro away and kill scvs, but at 170 supply scvs it's a slaughter. | ||
|
AmericanUmlaut
Germany2572 Posts
On October 11 2011 15:58 (kimi)YaSu wrote: I think there is a small degree of truth to this post. Since bronze players all got told to "macro better", doesn't that mean everyone is trying to do that? Therefore, thanks to forums, macroing better is no longer the only distinguishing line between good and bad players. Most players who are active also read the forums for tips and therefore all of our macro has gotten better. The standards of starcraft has risen. I understand where you're coming from with this post, but what you are saying is simply not true. Bronze players do get told that they need to work on their macro, but if they actually had good macro they would not be bronze players any more. You're probably right that lots of lower-level players are trying to macro better, but if they were succeeding they would no longer be lower-level players, as the ability to macro well is the single most important determining factor in whether you win or lose games. There are a lot of posts in this thread positing that there are low-level players who have great macro, and in my opinion that is simply not true. If you can achieve the goals of constantly making workers and constantly producing units without getting supply blocked and while keeping your money low, you would have to be doing such odd things with the resulting army to not be at least in Platinum that I just can't believe such a player exists. By all means, if you disagree, then put up a replay! I'd be very interested to see what bronze-level play with good macro looks like. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
Anyway, SCII is a game of economics and that is why macro is always the first problem to look at correcting before anything else. Expansion and upgrade timings are crucual to good macro, though. Upgrades, atleast the passive ones like +3/+3 are an awesome force multiplier to whatever A-move army you're making, and obviously you won't have a good economy if you expand too early and die, or expand too late and get oversaturated. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
On October 11 2011 16:44 AmericanUmlaut wrote: <snip> By all means, if you disagree, then put up a replay! I'd be very interested to see what bronze-level play with good macro looks like. Probably any Protoss player who drops his 9 pylon perfectly on time, constantly makes workers, gets his gateway(and core? not sure on timings) down perfectly and then dies to 6pool lings. Would he have had perfect macro afterwards? Probably not, but that's why you need to add a little cheese defence advice into the general "just focus on macro" advice to bronzies  | ||
|
aebriol
Norway2066 Posts
On October 11 2011 13:12 Ripps wrote: Didn't Destiny go from Bronze to Masters using Mass Queens only? Mechanics > Strategy, methinks. Bronze to plat I think ... it's not a valid strategy as such. | ||
|
AmericanUmlaut
Germany2572 Posts
On October 11 2011 21:45 Monkeyballs25 wrote: Probably any Protoss player who drops his 9 pylon perfectly on time, constantly makes workers, gets his gateway(and core? not sure on timings) down perfectly and then dies to 6pool lings. Would he have had perfect macro afterwards? Probably not, but that's why you need to add a little cheese defence advice into the general "just focus on macro" advice to bronzies You make a valid point to a certain extent, but even if you literally just died every time you got 6-pooled, you would still make it out of the lower leagues if you were meeting all the goals I describe. 6-pools aren't 50% of games on the ladder. Probe1 made a similar point, and I'll concede it: Macro and scouting and responding to cheese are the only things you should be really focusing on in low-level games. Regardless, you can't respond to cheese correctly without good macro either. Even responding correctly to a 6-pool is made much easier if your pylon and gateway go down as quickly as possible, and responding to stuff like 2-gate proxied Zealots or a Marine/SCV all-in is all about getting as many units as possible out as fast as you can. | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
On October 11 2011 22:00 AmericanUmlaut wrote: You make a valid point to a certain extent, but even if you literally just died every time you got 6-pooled, you would still make it out of the lower leagues if you were meeting all the goals I describe. 6-pools aren't 50% of games on the ladder. Probe1 made a similar point, and I'll concede it: Macro and scouting and responding to cheese are the only things you should be really focusing on in low-level games. Regardless, you can't respond to cheese correctly without good macro either. Even responding correctly to a 6-pool is made much easier if your pylon and gateway go down as quickly as possible, and responding to stuff like 2-gate proxied Zealots or a Marine/SCV all-in is all about getting as many units as possible out as fast as you can. With regards to the bit I highlighted: In fairness there is an absurd amount of cheese further down the ladder because many low ranked players are just looking to win as fast as possible. They may lose some, but they'll win more because its rare they'll come across a decently competent opponent. Hence cheesing is the fastest way to move up the ladder. Bad habit to learn to play that way from the very start; but its undeniably effective up to a certain point. So it tends to be really quite prevalent. | ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22631 Posts
On October 09 2011 14:11 Darth Caedus wrote: Yes the heroine ref was awesome, but no one ever acknowledges my posts cause im still sub-3-digits. It's depressing and I feel like I might need some heroine. Or maybe I just need to macro better. But heroine seems like the easier choice. There is a dark, secret place, where post-counts rise. | ||
|
NesQuick
United States6 Posts
| ||
|
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
I'll echo what someone else stated. When I started, I placed into gold. I quickly moved into diamond and then master when that league came around. The Secret? I watched the replay of "Favored" players who beat me. I memorized their build and copied it verbatim. Every time I played that match up, I would do that same build over and over and over. After a while, I learned how to improve it and why. Now, I'm Top 6 Master player who plays a good number of GMs. | ||
| ||
